The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Miss X’s complaints. One matter is closely related to matters we have already considered. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council operated the statutory complaints process relating to social care matters. And the Council had indicated when Miss X approached us that it would deal with her complaints about educational provision, so there would be no useful purpose in us doing so before it completes its work.
The complaint
Miss X complained about the Council response to her complaints. She said: She had police reports that would show the account provided by the Council of a serious incident involving her child was not correct; There were many emails that showed she had asked for support for her child and explained why the child could not take advantage of those offered; and Her complaints about her child’s education had been ignored.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Complaint a) concerns actions of the Council that are closely related to a decision the Council took to make Miss X’s child subject to a child protection plan. In complaint 25 007 145, we decided not to investigate that decision. We will not therefore investigate this matter, which relates to the council’s justification for the decision.
Complaint b) has not previously been considered by us. It concerns the support offered to Miss X’s child as a child in need between July and November 2024. The matter of the complaint was subject to the statutory three stage process for children’s social care complaints. That process involves an investigation at the second stage overseen by an independent person, and a review at Stage 3 of the conduct of the investigation. Where properly carried out, it is a robust process. We are only likely to consider the matters complained of where there is evidence the process was not followed, or where there is evidence the Council has not carried out any actions recommended by the third stage panel. In this case, the Stage 2 investigation gave reasons related to the extent of the Council’s duties in not finding fault with the time it took to carry out a child in need assessment, and the support it offered. It also found fault with the way the Council had dealt with the complaint at the first stage and suggested the Council give thought to a remedy. The independent person stated they were satisfied the investigation was properly carried out. The Stage 3 panel found no fault with the conduct of the investigation and recommended a remedy, which the Council accepted. The Council has sent me evidence that it has provided the remedy it agreed. That Miss X remains dissatisfied with the outcome does not give me reason to find fault with the way the Council operated the statutory complaints process.
Complaint c) concerns education matters. They are not subject to the statutory complaints process. We have already decided in complaints 24 011 063 and 24 018 674 that we cannot consider what provision or setting the Council named for Miss X‘s child’s education in the child’s Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. However, some of the education matters relate to alleged missed special educational provision for the child. I note the Council had offered to consider those complaints at the time when Miss X complained to us. Therefore, us now investigating whether the Council should have dealt with Miss X’s complaints about education is unlikely to lead anywhere. It remains the case that Miss X would be entitled to bring matters of alleged missed educational provision back to us if she were to be dissatisfied with the Council’s final response to them.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because: Complaint a) is closely related to matters we have already considered; There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council operated the statutory complaints process in relation to Complaint b); and There is no useful purpose in investigating Complaint c), which was not subject to the statutory complaints process, when the Council offered to consider it under its own corporate complaints procedure.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman